Resource 2024 AFL Draft discussion thread (Wed Nov 20 to Fri Nov 22)

[Vader]

Vader - not sure if you can help us out with this one or not. Does the club have a separate pool limit for SANFL contracted players with us who are not on our primary list? If we do, any chance one of the 2 is not drafted but contracted as an SANFL player at the same rate that we would have to pay them as rookies?

Further to my previous reply...

Schedule 4 Section 11 of the AFL and AFLW Collective Bargaining Agreement details the Termination Payment payable to delisted players. Players who had one or more years to run on their existing contract (i.e. Burgess & Schoenberg) are entitled to the base payment for each year following the year in which the AFL Player was delisted (i.e. their 2025 base payments), plus "a further number of Match Payments in respect of the AFL Competition calculated at the rate applicable to the relevant competition in which the AFL Player last played".

Section 28.22 of the Australian Football League Rules (23 February 2024) states that:

Unless otherwise determined by the Investigations Manager, all lump sum payments to a Player on termination of his Contract of Service shall be deemed to be Football Payments to the Player in the year in which such contract was terminated.

There are other clauses which modify this if they're added to another Club's list (via any mechanism) - but that's what happens if they don't end up on an AFL Club's list. What you suggest is simply not possible.

 

[jimvic]

FFS - we don't have any list positions available. We are committed to picking 1 player + Welsh. There is no position available on our list for Dodson or any other 3rd player.

sure - but if we did (say by some miracle someone makes an offer to Shooy), would you do that deal?

 

[Big Dub]

I can’t agree with talent outweighs needs. Maybe if there’s a Buddy Franklin available, but in general you simply have to address the weaknesses of your list. It’s been our biggest mistake in the last 10 years, not addressing the midfield with our top picks, and it’s the biggest reason of how uncompetitive we’ve been recently.

North might well take Tauru at 2 tomorrow, and you can be sure they don’t rate him the second best player. They are looking at list balance 100%.

The 2 players we selected on needs over talent were McAsey and Gallucci.

It didn't end well . . .

 

[Vader]

sure - but if we did (say by some miracle someone makes an offer to Shooy), would you do that deal?

Sure, I'd definitely think about it.

... but it's a pointless hypothetical, because we know there's less than 0% chance of it happening.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I can’t agree with talent outweighs needs. Maybe if there’s a Buddy Franklin available, but in general you simply have to address the weaknesses of your list. It’s been our biggest mistake in the last 10 years, not addressing the midfield with our top picks, and it’s the biggest reason of how uncompetitive we’ve been recently.

North might well take Tauru at 2 tomorrow, and you can be sure they don’t rate him the second best player. They are looking at list balance 100%.

Agreed !

It's about list balance, list needs & deficiencies
I do agree with picks 1-5 generally being best available .....but in this draft, it's been repeated infinitum, that the top 6-8 players are so even .....so people who think Clubs are not differentiating their selections on need, are simply not critically thinking the scenario

 

[WaynesWorld19]

The 2 players we selected on needs over talent were McAsey and Gallucci.

It didn't end well . . .

Yes, but Jeffcrowe is stating players in the top 10 are always selected on talent, and needs doesn't come into it

 

[Danger in Texas]

Yes, but Jeffcrowe is stating players in the top 10 are always selected on talent, and needs doesn't come into it

I think it’s more a case of, when clubs are picking their talent order, sometimes if there is a glaring need on the list, there’s an element of bias that comes into play

 

[Captain Furious]

The 2 players we selected on needs over talent were McAsey and Gallucci.

It didn't end well . . .

The ‘best player available’ line is such an overused cliche. If the best player available to us at 4 on draft night was KPF or KPD, you’re saying we take them over a mid?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I think it’s more a case of, when clubs are picking their talent order, sometimes if there is a glaring need on the list, there’s an element of bias that comes into play

So you're saying they're meeting their needs by subconscious bias ......



Of course Clubs bias needs .....it's more the messaging they have to sell to supporters versus conversations being had behind closed doors ......chalk & cheese

 

[Danger in Texas]

So you're saying they're meeting their needs by subconscious bias ......

View attachment 2169286

Of course Clubs bias needs .....it's more the messaging they have to sell to supporters versus conversations being had behind closed doors ......chalk & cheese

Well I’d call any club that actively selects a player that is 3 or 4 spots lower on their talent order than another available player just because they ‘potentially’ fill a need, so so dumb

A talent order is called a ‘talent order’ for a reason

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Yes, but Jeffcrowe is stating players in the top 10 are always selected on talent, and needs doesn't come into it

Hahaha never said that but early picks are GENERALLY on talent

Ie in this draft why would everyone take midfielders early ? Do they all need midfielders mostly ? How about north melb and melb ? What do you think their lists need ?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

The ‘best player available’ line is such an overused cliche. If the best player available to us at 4 on draft night was KPF or KPD, you’re saying we take them over a mid?

That's what some would have us believe .....supporters sick of not getting an elite Mid ..."but we have to stick to our talent order & select that CHB"

By whatever measure, people can't be that naive to think we aren't looking at needs .....I'm not saying we make a huge stretch in our Draft selection, simply to meet our need .....simply where it's a close call, need will trump talent

Much the same way as we'll go local SA boy over interstate in a 50/50

I'm saying our need for midfield speed trumps the big bodied mid, who isn't a need

 

[Crow till I die]

Well I’d call any club that actively selects a player that is 3 or 4 spots lower on their talent order than another available player just because they ‘potentially’ fill a need, so so dumb

A talent order is called a ‘talent order’ for a reason

Depends where in the draft - at the back end if we have grabbed a few picks already and need a ruck, the ruck might not be above a few others on the talent list, but at that stage of the draft, we take him as a need. But not at the top end of the draft.

 

[spenze]

That's absolute rubbish, GWV Rebels work with the RAD Centre in Ballarat who are considered world class. Eamon Gill at the Rebels is his mentor, if you knew Eamon Gill you'd know that's absolute bullshit.

Calm down Alan Jones.

I know he was doing rehab at RAD, where in the world do you think I got the info from?

Stop white knighting the boy, it's creepy

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Hahaha never said that but early picks are GENERALLY on talent

Ie in this draft why would everyone take midfielders early ? Do they all need midfielders mostly ? How about north melb and melb ? What do you think their lists need ?

You said always on talent !

I've said needs where it's a close call .....Tauru for NORTH was about need .....hence why they were prepared to drop back in the Draft
A difficult situation for North to sell supporters ....supporters want arguably the #1 player in the Draft, North want to strengthen DEF and get another KPF

MELB also hunting a KPB (May replacement) and KPF .....but also would be wary of Oliver's clouded future ..... so they're more flexible in this Draft

Where the Draft is labelled a Mid Draft .....or a talls Draft ....the Crows have generally gone with the Draft Strength

 

[Danger in Texas]

Depends where in the draft - at the back end if we have grabbed a few picks already and need a ruck, the ruck might not be above a few others on the talent list, but at that stage of the draft, we take him as a need. But not at the top end of the draft.

Yeah in the back end there’s more of a reason to do so

But not where the highest level talent lies

 

[Danger in Texas]

Calm down Alan Jones.

I know he was doing rehab at RAD, where in the world do you think I got the info from?

Stop white knighting the boy, it's creepy

Lay off it mate, using words like ‘creepy’ is you clearly trying a wind-up

 

[Mutineer]

Calm down Alan Jones.

I know he was doing rehab at RAD, where in the world do you think I got the info from?

Stop white knighting the boy, it's creepy

When you stop posting stuff I know to be bullshit I will.

 

[Danger in Texas]

From the Carlton board (sounded like inside info the way it was mentioned)

I think if all candidates were Victorian then Langford doesn't slide past pick 4.

Does that mean if Draper was VIC, we’d take Langford?

 

[baaaallllll]

Is it Wednesday yet...

 

[pjcrows]

Labelling players as "potential whipping boys" before they're even drafted?

Never change, Big Footy.

 

[Scorpus]

The ‘best player available’ line is such an overused cliche. If the best player available to us at 4 on draft night was KPF or KPD, you’re saying we take them over a mid?

Clubs position themselves in the draft so the best available player at their pick is also the player type they need

 

[anyfourcrowseyed]

Noticed Hamish's article stated we could move up or back

Wonder if North pull the bolter, Tauru at 2, we might look to trade back to 6 and gain future capital, draft Draper 6

My guess is if we stay at 4 we go Langford, if we trade up we go Jagga, if we trade down we go Draper

 

[Danger in Texas]

Twomey sticking with Draper to Crows in his late mail

 

[LC40]

Pace, draft pace.